Install
$ agentstack add skill-igorsolop0-qa-claude-skills-pw-test-review ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
pw-test-review
Behavioral review of Playwright tests — find anti-patterns that cause flakes, false positives, slow runs, or hidden bugs. Not a stylistic linter.
When this skill applies
Trigger on requests like:
- "Review this playwright test"
- "Is this test good / flaky / OK?"
- "Why is this test flaky?"
- "Code smell in this PW spec"
- "PR review for playwright"
- A
.spec.ts/.test.ts/e2efile shared without explicit instructions — assume review.
If the user shares a whole directory, scan all .spec.ts / .test.ts files; otherwise focus on what they share.
Workflow
- Read the test code. For each file the user supplies — open it, look at the actual contents. Don't review off vibes.
- Walk the anti-pattern catalog. Read
references/anti-patterns.mdand check each item against the code. The catalog is organized by priority — work top-down, capture line numbers and code snippets as you go. - Context-aware bumps. If the user mentions money / iGaming / fintech / KYC / balances, raise the priority of
toContainTextand uncheckedresponse.status()findings by one level. They cause silent bugs in those domains. - Write the report. Use the structure in
references/output-template.md. Skip empty sections. Cite line numbers. One sentence per "why" — explain mechanism, not policy. - Don't fabricate. If a category has no findings, omit it. Better three sharp findings than ten wobbly ones. Always include a "What's good" section — tells the author what to keep.
Philosophy
The user is a senior QA engineer. They value root-cause reasoning over rules. For every finding, the "why" should explain the mechanism by which the pattern causes a problem — not "the docs say so", not "best practice". If you can't justify a finding by mechanism, drop it.
This is a behavioral review. Don't nitpick formatting, variable naming, semicolons, import order, or stylistic preferences — that's what ESLint and Prettier are for. Focus on patterns that cause real flakes, false positives, slow runs, or hidden bugs.
References
references/anti-patterns.md— full catalog of patterns to flag, grouped Critical → Low, with mechanism and fix for each.references/output-template.md— exact output structure.
Open both at the start of every review.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: Igorsolop0
- Source: Igorsolop0/qa-claude-skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.